Event Abstract

Back to Event

Deficient inhibition in alcohol-dependence: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study.

Caroline Quoilin1*, Philippe De Timary1 and Julie Duque1
  • 1 Institute of Neuroscience, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium

Background: The development, maintenance, and relapse phenomena in alcohol-dependence has been related to an impaired inhibitory control, but the neural correlates of this deficit are still unclear1. As impaired inhibition has been classically understood as a pure cognitive deficit, most studies have focused on prefrontal areas, while little attention has been given to the role of more “primary” structures, such as the motor system. Importantly, recent transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies have observed profound inhibitory changes in the motor output pathway during the preparation of actions2-6; this neural motor inhibition is thought to assist goal-directed behaviors by suppressing neural activity that could cause premature or inappropriate responses7-9. Thus, as inhibition of the motor system supports the ability to subjugate inappropriate behaviors and because this aptitude is altered in alcohol-dependence, we tested the hypothesis that alcohol-dependent (AD) patients may suffer from a shortage of neural motor inhibition. Methods: Single TMS pulses were applied over the right and the left primary motor cortex to elicit motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in the left and the right hand, respectively, of 20 detoxified ADs and 20 matched healthy subjects performing a choice reaction time task. In addition, behavioral inhibitory aptitudes and trait impulsivity were assessed in all participants. Finally, the patients were called back one year after the experiment to evaluate their relapse status and the potential relationship with motor inhibition. Results: As expected, AD patients exhibited poorer behavioral inhibition and higher trait impulsivity than control subjects. More importantly, the TMS experiment revealed a considerable shortage of neural motor inhibition in AD patients. Interestingly, the patients who resumed consuming alcohol within the year following the experiment were those displaying the strongest deficits, both at the behavioral and the neural levels, while the relapse status did not depend on the trait impulsivity measure. Conclusions: Our data suggest a strong motor component in the neural correlate of altered inhibitory control in AD patients. They also highlight an intriguing relationship with relapse and the perspective of a new biomarker to follow strategies aiming at reducing relapse in AD patients. Short lay summary: Impaired inhibitory control is a core element of alcohol-dependence. So far, most studies investigating the neural correlates of this deficit have focused on prefrontal areas, overlooking the contribution of more “primary” structures, such as the motor cortex. Yet, appropriate neural motor inhibition may be a central aspect of healthy behavior. Here, by using transcranial magnetic stimulation, we revealed a deficit in neural motor inhibition in alcohol-dependent patients relative to control subjects. Moreover, this alteration was stronger in patients who ended-up relapsing during the year following the experiment, suggesting that it may represent a new biomarker of the risk for relapse.

References

1. Wilcox, CE, Dekonenko, CJ, Mayer, AR, Bogenschutz, MP, & Turner, JA (2014). Cognitive control in alcohol use disorder: deficits and clinical relevance. Rev Neurosci. 25, 1-24. doi: 10.1515/revneuro-2013-0054. 2. Duque J, Labruna L, Cazares C, & Ivry RB (2014). Dissociating the influence of response selection and task anticipation on corticospinal suppression during response preparation. Neuropsychologia 65, 287-96. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.08.006. 3. Duque J, Petitjean C, & Swinnen SP (2016). Effect of aging on motor inhibition during action preparation under sensory conflict. Front Aging Neurosci. 8, 322. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2016.00322. 4. Quoilin C, Lambert J, Jacob B, Klein PA, & Duque J (2016). Comparison of motor inhibition in variants of the instructed-delay choice reaction time task. PLoS One 11, e0161964. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161964. 5. Vassiliadis P, Grandjean J, Derosiere G, de Wilde Y, Quemener L, & Duque J. (2018). Using a double-coil TMS protocol to assess preparatory inhibition bilaterally. Front Neurosci. 12, 139. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2018.00139. 6. Wilhelm E, Quoilin C, Petitjean C, & Duque J (2016). A double-coil TMS method to assess corticospinal excitability changes at a near-simultaneous time in the two hands during movement preparation. Front Hum Neurosci. 10, 88. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00088. 7. Bestmann S, & Duque J (2016). Transcranial magnetic stimulation: decomposing the processes underlying action preparation. Neuroscientist 22, 392-405. doi: 10.1177/1073858415592594. 8. Duque J, Greenhouse I, Labruna L, & Ivry RB (2017). Physiological markers of motor inhibition during human behavior. Trends Neurosci. 40, 219-236. doi: 10.1177/1073858415592594. 9. Quoilin C, & Derosiere G (2015). Global and specific motor inhibitory mechanisms during action preparation. J Neurosci. 35, 16297-16299. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3664-15.2015.

Keywords: alcohol-dependence, Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), Inhibitory Control, action selection, relapse

Conference: Belgian Brain Congress 2018 — Belgian Brain Council, LIEGE, Belgium, 19 Oct - 19 Oct, 2018.

Presentation Type: e-posters

Topic: NOVEL STRATEGIES FOR NEUROLOGICAL AND MENTAL DISORDERS: SCIENTIFIC BASIS AND VALUE FOR PATIENT-CENTERED CARE

Citation: Quoilin C, De Timary P and Duque J (2019). Deficient inhibition in alcohol-dependence: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study.. Front. Neurosci. Conference Abstract: Belgian Brain Congress 2018 — Belgian Brain Council. doi: 10.3389/conf.fnins.2018.95.00034

Copyright: The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers. They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.

The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.

Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.

For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.

Received: 13 Aug 2018; Published Online: 17 Jan 2019.

* Correspondence: PhD. Caroline Quoilin, Institute of Neuroscience, Catholic University of Leuven, Louvain-la-Neuve, Walloon Brabant, 1200 Brussels, Belgium, caroline.quoilin@gmail.com